House Bill 5440 will become effective on October 1, 2012.
Here it is:
AN ACT CONCERNING VISITATION RIGHTS FOR GRANDPARENTS AND OTHER PERSONS.
I disagree with those who believe that this new Act is a “victory” for grandparents. In no way does this Act make it easier for a grandparent or third party to obtain an order for visitation.
The new Act simply sets forth what case law already established. In order for grandparents or other third parties to be awarded visitation they must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that:
- A parent-like relationship exists between them and the child; and
- The child will suffer real and substantial harm if the visitation is denied. (This means a degree of harm analogous to a claim that the child is neglected under Connecticut child welfare statutes).
What is new is the list of factors that a judge may consider when deciding whether a parent-like relationship exists.
These factors appear to impose additional requirements on grandparents and other third parties seeking visitation in Family Court.
The three most important of these are:
- The existence and length of the relationship between the grandparent and child;
- The specific parent-like activities of the person seeking visitation toward the child; and
- The fitness of the person seeking visitation.
The Bill also specifies that even if a court orders visitation, the visitation schedule will not prevent a custodial parent from relocating. Therefore, in some cases, a custodial parent’s decision to move would effectively terminate visitation.
Finally, the judge can order any party to pay the other’s fees, including those charged by the guardian ad litem or any expert. This will likely discourage some grandparents from fully litigating a visitation petition.
I think the objective of the new law was to be “grandparent friendly”. If so, the drafters failed.